No, nothing to do with grossly violating the Geneva Conventions in this article.
I really can't complain too much about these kids pissing all over the Geneva Conventions too much when the investigators can't figure out the difference between "felony" and "violation of international humanitarian law". I really can't. It might have something to do with how fucking clueless many modern troops now seem to be of the UCMJ to begin with, and that is a much shorter list of rules and regulations.
Well, there goes the last of my support for the troops there, despite whatever comes from higher up. Now I definitely have to see a hell of a lot more to validate any reason why I should further support the misconduct that seems fully allowed, given the official okay by the Army spokeman, and rampant throughout the US armed forces while the investigators sit on their balls. So far, honor hasn't only been stepped on, but greedily so and for reasons like this.
As long as the Geneva Convention is being pissed upon, SCREW the troops. After all, think of how many who used the site while serving ("Now, he said, some 30,000 of his 220,000 registered users or military members serving in the war zones." - 30k, and the inspectors can't find any specific evidence! That also says a LOT about 'secure comms'.), at least a few must have been in a rank to be obligated to upholding the GCs and be held responsible for other troops. (To also clarify this a bit more, this doesn't mean all troops should be loathed - just those who abused, were aware of, and excused any "support the troops" gratuities bought with war crimes.)
"There is no criminal investigation into the matter of photos of deceased bodies in Iraq being posted on the worldwide Web anonymously," Army spokesman Paul Boyce said. "Army criminal investigators examined this recently as a preliminary inquiry but found there is no specific evidence of a felony crime."
I really can't complain too much about these kids pissing all over the Geneva Conventions too much when the investigators can't figure out the difference between "felony" and "violation of international humanitarian law". I really can't. It might have something to do with how fucking clueless many modern troops now seem to be of the UCMJ to begin with, and that is a much shorter list of rules and regulations.
Well, there goes the last of my support for the troops there, despite whatever comes from higher up. Now I definitely have to see a hell of a lot more to validate any reason why I should further support the misconduct that seems fully allowed, given the official okay by the Army spokeman, and rampant throughout the US armed forces while the investigators sit on their balls. So far, honor hasn't only been stepped on, but greedily so and for reasons like this.
As long as the Geneva Convention is being pissed upon, SCREW the troops. After all, think of how many who used the site while serving ("Now, he said, some 30,000 of his 220,000 registered users or military members serving in the war zones." - 30k, and the inspectors can't find any specific evidence! That also says a LOT about 'secure comms'.), at least a few must have been in a rank to be obligated to upholding the GCs and be held responsible for other troops. (To also clarify this a bit more, this doesn't mean all troops should be loathed - just those who abused, were aware of, and excused any "support the troops" gratuities bought with war crimes.)